DNA in the Evolution of KM and OD: Can we adapt to drive meaningful change?
As covered in my recent KM-OD post and discussed in my KM World 2012 W5 workshop, the modern organization needs every shred of productivity and innovation capacity it can muster. But buzz words and aphorisms abound in this space.
Can we actually make a meaningful difference?
I’ve found that traditional practices of Knowledge Management (KM) and Organization Development (OD) have struggled when it comes to getting people meaningfully engaged on the topic of learning. It can be an abstract discussion. Uncomfortable with ambiguity and not knowing, most of us quickly we turn to process manuals, documenting what we think we know, or running training classes. For KM and OD to evolve .. for the modern organization to truly embark on learning how to learn .. we must change the approach.
And what role does organized Education play in all this?
I discuss some ideas for this in The DNA of Collaboration (Ch.19). In today’s virtual Book Tour conversation, let’s discuss a few of the key points:
- Q1. KM should help knowledge moves through organizations and generate value. Does this happen where you work?
- Q2. Does an OD function in your organization exist? Does it help teach people to learn?
- Q3. What are the synergies between KM and OD?
- Q4. How can organized Education influence/guide this evolution?
- Q5. Senge and Wheatley have said much on learning in the collaborative context. Is it still relevant?
- Q6. New thinking about change (per Hagel): a shift from structure to flow, reflecting how we learn. Agree?
You can join the conversation via TweetChat here.
Note that Saturday is becoming our Global CDNA conversation, with N.Amercian (US & CN) CDNA conversations breaking out Monday evenings, moving to alternate weeks in January.
Intrigued? Reach out, let me know your thoughts.
Chris Jones, aka @sourcepov, author
3 Comments | tags: #cdna, capacity, change, education, hagel, KM, learning, metaphor, OD, senge, wheatley | posted in booktour, knowledge management, learning, organizational development
No shortage of change these days, but the question for most quickly becomes: Are We Ready? There is some great literature in the space, grounded by the foundational work of John Kotter and others, but most find when it is time for the hard work, most remain flat footed, unsure if they’re ready.
Can we measure our readiness?
In The DNA of Collaboration, Chapter 18, I introduce a simple measurement framework that helps us set relative goals at 100% for all the vectors we want to manage, and we plot a point on each vector. What results is a spider diagram. I’m working on a sample for upcoming discussions.
In today’s chat, let’s discuss the approach from a practical perspective, with the ultimate question: “Can we measure our preparation for change?”
- Q1. Can we measure subjective gaps (knowledge, buy-in, commitment) in quantitative ways?
- Q2. What are some key Change vectors we should try to measure?
- Q3. How do people respond to being measured?
- Q4. Are there ways to mitigate ‘people measurement’ resistance?
- Q5. From a strategy perspective, what light does that shed on “high stakes testing?”?
Hope you’ll join us, 11aET. You click use tweetchat w/ hashtag #cdna to participate. We’ll see you online!
Chris aka @sourcepov, author, The DNA of Collaboration
P.S. You may want to check out these Measurement models, described in the book:
FIG 11 – Collaboration Framework from The DNA of Collaboration
FIG 27 – Collaboration Framework (applied) from The DNA of Collaboration
Leave a comment | tags: change, kotter, learning, measurement, spider diagram | posted in booktour, leadership, learning
In the game of chess, every move brings important decisions. Is it best to advance, and stake a claim to new ground? Or to retreat, consolidating gains? Taking the lead, or letting the person across the game board set the pace?
Collaboration is fraught with decisions like these, where we must decide how to engage, and then revisit those decisions again and again, making adjustments.
Much depends, of course on our intentions and the context of the situation at hand. Are we there to share and inform, or to learn? Ultimately, isn’t it some of both?
In the context of effective team dynamics, I believe we need a balanced strategy, finding the optimal place between extremes, sharing and learning in useful ways. It’s about letting the circumstance of your knowledge, the topic, and the chemistry of the group tap new, “emergent” possibilities.
As we continue to explore the dynamics of effective collaboration in The DNA of Collaboration, “Balanced Objectives” (Ch.17) asks us to consider the importance of a balanced approach, and to understand how to get there.
In our chat SAT Nov 17 11aET (click here to join), let’s unpack it like this:
- Q1. Explore the shifting dynamic of teacher v. learner in a collaborative context.
- Q2. As in chess, collaborators balance opportunities to advance v. consolidating gains. Can we switch often and be productive?
- Q3. To achieve collaborative balance, must our roles keep shifting between leading and following?
- Q4. Is there an optimal balance between structured process and a more open, creative flow?
Hope this helps bring the balancing act of collaboration a bit more into focus. It’s critical thinking at the micro level, making decisions in the moment. When it comes to solving problems in teams, paying attention to dynamics like these pays huge rewards.
Challenge me with your thoughts and ideas .. we’re all here to learn! I’ll see you online!
– Chris Jones, author, aka @sourcepov
1 Comment | tags: #cdna, adapting, attention, balance, collaboration, decisions, flow, learning, problem solving, structure, teacher | posted in balance, booktour, critical thinking, flow, learning
As we move toward team dynamics that are based less on structure and more on flow, we face a dilemma. We gain the benefit of new thinking, serendipity and emerging ideas, but isn’t there danger that we lose focus?
The short answer is yes.
We must explore the need for balance points. We’ll also need a flexible lightweight process that allows us to navigate the challenges we’ll encounter. In my experience there are several ways we can enable the benefits of collaborative flow without losing our way. In today’s Book Review topic, as we explore The DNA of Collaboration Chapter 16 on Process, let’s take apart some of the most important contributing factors:
- Step 1. Framing. We need enough structure to support a dialog, but space for it to evolve. How can we shift our facilitation thinking away from control?
- Step 2. Guidelines & Introductions. Who is here? Why? How is this going to work?
- Step 3. Context. We often plow into collaboration w/o thought to relevance. What are the challenges of changing context in real time, during the conversation? When should context be set? held? changed?
- Step 4. Brainstorm & Dialog. How will we interact?
- Step 5. Patterns. Looking for Patterns is like “mining for gold”. What practices can make this easier, more intuitive, more common?
- Step 6. Synthesis. Aka “curation,” it’s about capture, prioritization of outcomes, and teasing out the value. Why is this so difficult? How can we get better at it?
Many who participate in the most established Twitter Chats will notice some of these elements. I believe they have evolved into their current form due to social collaboration in action. In fact, we continue to explore these dynamics at #smchat (social media), #ecosys (k12 edreform) and of course here at #cdna (collaboration practice).
Share your thoughts. Which aspects of these steps resonate? Which of these do you use most frequently?
Looking forward to our conversation. See you online.
Chris aka @sourcepov
3 Comments | tags: #cdna, #CollabDNA, collaboration, focus, language, learning, patterns, semantics | posted in booktour, context, control
In a world where many if not most leaders cut their teeth as managers, it’s small wonder the bias at the top of organizations and teams is for controlling outcomes. As we’ve discussed, there is a strong bias for structure baked into our industrial paradigm. Most teams are run with the precision of factories.
Can leaders adapt to different models? Better still, can they learn adaptive behaviors, in general?
I explore precisely that challenge in Chapter 15 of The DNA of Collaboration. In our virtual book tour, we’ll explore some of the key concepts:
- Q1. Viewing leadership as an art, how can we change our bias from structure to flow?
- Q2. Music and fine arts offer leaders alternative views to how things work; can we borrow a stage, brush or canvas?
- Q3. One goal of any team is affinity, aka common ground: how fast can we get there?
- Q4. Diversity is key as well. Does our affinity goal represent a paradox?
- Q5. In a high stakes world, how can leaders, like artists, learn to let go, experiment, take risks?
Hope you’ll join us SAT 11/3 11am ET. We use hash tag #cdna. You can click here at the appointed hour to join the conversation using TweetChat.
Hope to see you there.
– Chris Jones, aka @sourcepov, author
Leave a comment | tags: #cdna, #CollabDNA, adaptation, affinity, art, change, collaboration, diversity, factory model, growth mindset, intention, leadership, motivation, music, trust | posted in booktour, leadership, team dynamics
Promo image from “Whose Line is it Anyway?” courtesy ABC
When we come together as a team, whether instinctively or out of habit, we tend to gravitate to natural roles that we find comfortable, whether as contributors or listeners, active participants or passive observers, leaders or supporting cast. Depending on the group, there can be lots in play at once, but we tend to overlook the dynamics.
Consider an improv comedy troupe performing live, or a band working out tracks in a recording studio. What’s really happening? Can we tease out more explicit roles that influence our collaborative results? I think we can. Too often we don’t put thought into the kinds of participation we really need. We discussed this last fall in our KM World W5 work session and explored the dynamics still further here in Charlotte at our QCF “New Thinking” workshop (slides).
Let’s keep the exploration going.
The #CDNA Crew has launched a new series MONDAYs at 8pET on Key Roles in Collaboration. It’s the focus of Chapter 14 in The DNA of Collaboration (in softcover or Kindle on Amazon) and it’s almost always a conversation that strikes a chord.
In the weeks ahead, we’ll attack these roles, one by one, to see what we might learn:
- Q1. Catalyst. In what ways can we spark new thinking in our discussions?
- Q2. Connector. What happens when we connect ideas during a collaborative session or chat? And to make this happen more, what are: (a.) key initial conditions? (b.) supporting behaviors? (c.) times they add most value? (d.) situations when their role is most important?
- Q3. Aggregator/Curator. Often this means lots of work. How can we make the capture/takeaways of ideas more interesting?
- Q4. Moderator/Planner. What skills make these leadership role effective?
- Q5. Analyst. How do we make time for facts, data, and critical thinking?
- Q6. Challenger. Can we take issue in constructive ways, without coming across as a naysayer?
- Q7. Designer. What is the potential for truly creative thinking? Does a meeting afford enough “white space” for this?
- Q8. Historian/Researcher. How can these important activities happen in real time?
- Q9. Referee. Is there a place for (simple) rules, and how do we ensure healthy boundaries?
- Q10. Practitioner. What’s the best way to engage the hands-on folks that practice what’s being discussed?
- Q11. Expert/SME. These folks often kill collaboration with the weight of their knowledge; how can this be avoided?
- Q12. Did we leave out any roles? If so, which ones, and why?
I’ll be posting takeaways as comments to this post, but I’d really appreciate it if you’d do the same. The value is in our diverse perspectives ..
Again, hope to see you guys for the conversation MONDAYs 8pET using hash tag #cdna .. many folks use Tweetchat (link). See you there. What role will you play?
Chris aka @sourcepov
Leave a comment | tags: aggregator, catalyst, chat, collaboration, connector, curation, curator, leadership, moderator, roles | posted in booktour, flow, roles, team dynamics
With such a great turnout and set of discussions at KM World 2012, I wanted to spend a few minutes touching on some of the key takeaways. These need to be expanded .. but let’s start the conversation here ..
- Q1. KM is becoming more about how knowledge moves through organizations and generates value. Does this happen where you work?
- Q2. KM helps us learn about learning. How relevant is this in your org today?
- Q3. A key message in KM is moving from structure to flow as prevailing metaphor, reflecting how we learn. Agree?
We’ll discuss this SAT 10/20 at 11aET.
Excited that our book debuted at the conference, with a deep dive at workshop W5 on Tuesday.
Intrigued? Reach out, let me know your thoughts.
1 Comment | tags: culture, flow, KM, knowledge management, learning, structure | posted in booktour, f2f events, knowledge management, organizational development
Clearly, collaboration requires a venue, a space where people can come together and share ideas. But to open opportunities for flow, we’ll need to work to get outside the box of traditional meetings. As low tech and old school as it seems, a conference room provides many of the necessary trappings needed for in-depth conversation.
But what else is needed for flow?
As we prepare for KMW12 W5 tomorrow, let’s tap tonight’s special #cdna chat to unpack this.
- Q1. How can space be modified to capture ideas more fluidly, perhaps using un-conferences as a guide?
- Q2. How might adaptive facilitation further open dialog?
- Q3. What metaphors for flow might help collaborators further shed notions of structured facilitation?
- Q4. Can visualizing idea streams make a difference?
Hope to see you online, as we begin to unpack “flow” in the collaborative context.
– Chris Jones aka SourcePOV, author, The DNA of Collaboration
Leave a comment | tags: #cdna, collaboration, flow, metaphor, mindset, space | posted in booktour, flow, space
Excited that our author, Chris Jones, will be speaking at KMWorld in Washington, DC on 10/16, leading Workshop W5: Knowledge Networks and the Flow of Insights. The session will be a great opportunity to delve into aspects of The DNA of Collaboration that deal with the collaboration process itself, including roles, space/venue and synthesis.
See the SourcePOV blog for more on the planned 3-hour session. Registration is still open at the KMWorld site
Also, you’ll find more about the event in the news, courtesy PR Web.
Leave a comment | tags: collaboration, factory model, flow, metaphor | posted in booktour, f2f events, knowledge management
Many connect the pursuit of critical thinking to the behavior of a group of stakeholders that I’ve come to call contrarians but we need to tread carefully on the semantics. There’s a valuable role for challenging assumptions, taking an alternative view, even a healthy debate. Those who help drive such thinking I call ‘challengers’. It’s a key role that I outline in Ch.14.
Contrast all that with the dynamic in unhealthy debates. These are, sadly, all too common.
Contrarians play only to win. They argue for the sake of arguing. They don’t listen, and don’t respect the views of others. These behaviors can halt the flow of collaborative insights, often becoming a death blow to team dynamics. In Chapter 11 of The DNA of Collaboration, I unpack this important area. Let’s unpack some of the major drivers:
- Q1 How do respect and healthy boundaries influence our ability to collaborate?
- Q2 Broadcasting, talking over others and controlling the floor spell trouble. What can be done?
- Q3 When emotions rise, we stop thinking clearly .. have you seen this happen? What do you do about it?
- Q4 Arranging for up-front Opt-in to rules & participation changes the mix. Is self-selection a game changer?
We’ll discuss this today at 11am ET at Twitter hashtag #cdna. I hope you’ll join us!
– Chris Jones, author, @CollabDNA aka @sourcepov
Leave a comment | tags: challengers, collaboration, contrarians, control, devils advocates, ego, flooding, Goleman, hijacking, power, projecting | posted in active listening, booktour, critical thinking